Ian Nathan

The film seems to be pitched at shrieking level, as if that’s the only timbre children can register.

However exotic the locations and starry the stars, there’s no escaping this is The Devil’s Advocate of online gambling. Fold.

Ridiculous premise and hilarious acting which is mostly famous for the Lolita-type Brooke Shields cavorting in tropical settings.

Unoriginal, unfunny superhero spoof with a bewildered cast and an obvious plot.

Moore just looks confused. He obviously wants to do his thing then hit the bar for cocktails, but John Glen is nagging him to add a roughness to the slick exterior. Equally, it just doesn’t fit. The news is clear, there’s only so far you can push a Bond before it breaks.

Overlong, it'll most likely try the patience of audiences now accustomed to a bit more bang for their buck, but it's a great deal of fun for those with a penchant for old-style action.

This was sweet and charming at the time but now it just lacks either the comedy or sophistication of kids' fantasy film that we've all become accustomed to.

Here is a film fully xenophobic, abhorrent film, touting guileless version of military honour, but with Jack Cardiff’s furtive camerawork and some excellent editing, it sucks you in to its disturbing heroic sweep.

An uneven debut from John Slattery that nonetheless shows flashes of flair and a jet-black sense of humour.

For all the special effects and half-starved A-listers, this is a sodden beast. Perhaps there’s a reason that Melville only told half the story.

Not even a decent performance from Richard Attenborough can save this disappointing production.

You end up with this perky but pointless rehash of the cute alien format that became embedded in the late ‘80s.

Deliberately provocative, infuriatingly melodramatic, this is a film that begs not to be taken seriously, and requires a ready suspension of moral discernment for maximum enjoyment.

Mind you, Eastwood went on the star with an orang-utan, twice, so this is only his third maddest film. Although, it could be his dullest. Which was one thing no one would of expected of this madcap enterprise, born of a what-the-heck attitude from its macho stars — that it would struggle so hard to be fun.

There were a few sci-fi movies in the 70s that managed to transcend the genre and become fairly well known in the mainstream. This weren't one of 'em and for good reason.

Star Wars it wasn't and still isn't...camp 70's space stuff but the TV series spin-off is a fond memory for 30-somethings throughout the Western World.

A spectacular misfire from a director who should have known better.

Despite DiCaprio’s prize performance, purists will fume, but even as lit-crashing razzle-dazzle entertainment Luhrmann’s adaptation is a candelabrum too far.

Should be judged in context but even then it's a bit high on the melodrama and low on subtlety.

As with all great spoofers, you can feel the love the director has for Hitchcock, the thoroughness of his jokes vouches for that and the entire plot is loosely based on Spellbound. Perhaps, he was too devoted, the film lacks daring, it’s soft, Hitch would have sneered at such weakness.

A general disappointment, but then with David Bowie and Patsy Kensit what did you expect.

Pointless re-make. One of (the once great) Carpenter's worst.

Despite the always-good Harvey Keitel, this is just embarassing sci-fi nonsense.

Okay, a couple of sniggers sneak out, but on the whole the effect is stone cold.